Uninformed and uncontrolled use of industrial farming toxins and unsustainable farming techniques have led to the emergence of the organic food industry. The public refused to remain trusting and gullible towards accepting whatever it was offered. The widely prevailing naivety that the earth could absorb and neutralise anything we poured into her, and that people could resist detrimental effects from industrial toxins, was destroyed. The organic food industry arose as a branch of the 'save the world' movement which itself probably had its beginnings with the hippie revolution in the fifties and sixties.

This counter-culture was a reaction to the crises emerging from the devastation of WWII, the nuclear age and the cold war. The etymology of the name hippie has a number of theories but one detail in particular holds especially close to the conspicuous spirit of the movement: The flower power, 'love is all we have' movement mandated itself to search for a better way than humanity had gone. The real hippie became something in the vein of an Indian sadhu - the Western version of someone dedicated to the search for idealism and purity.

That says it all. When we strive to heal, we must treat the condition down to its specific point of origin. Without this we are only treating symptoms or secondary conditions and our efforts are therefore ultimately futile. Changing course from an omnivorous lifestyle that in many cases has been the norm for generation upon generation is a big move. Something very strong must stir in the human spirit to bring about this change. Quite likely it is the yearning to re-establish an originally natural human lifestyle, but which has lain a largely dormant and unconscious memory across the ages.

People who have turned vegetarian have mostly done so as a form of self-healing. An opportunity which had been unconsciously waited for across generations availed itself to allow change. In one way or another people sensed discomfort and grotesqueness through their complacent adherence to prevailing social norms. Under guidance of conscience they initiated changes to their attitude and intercepted certain areas of their behaviour. Their sense of discomfort began to ease as they adjusted their lives towards the elimination of killing, exploitation and cruelty. This sense of ease gave indication they were on the right track.

Some of these people found sufficient peace only after they separated themselves from use of all animal products. Fewer again were drawn to extend their non-killing agenda to issues like abortion and pacifism. Veganism became the common house of many of these people. Although philosophical branches exist within the generalisation of veganism, living without the use (or endorsement) of killing, enslavement or cause of suffering has been an acceptable description most vegans have of themselves.

With the advent of applied genetic technology in the market place, this description should now include the exclusion from diet or other use, all biological material containing genetic components taken from sentient creatures. Although not directly linked to this principle, it is very likely wise to exclude the use of all genetically modified food irrespective of whether it contains animal genetic components.

This definition indicates the problematic areas vegans now have with social norms and also with the organic's industry. The latter excludes genetically engineered products but promotes and (for accreditation of produce) requires the use of animal by-products as a means of maintaining and enhancing a 'natural' eco-system.

The organic's philosophy attributes no negative ethical significance to either slaughtering animals (organic and biodynamic meat, eggs and milk etc. are available in 'health' shops) or using animal by-products to grow vegetables. Indeed, the organic's industry rests heavily, if not fundamentally on the 'food-chain is natural' paradigm.

There is no dispute that the food chain exists as an omnivorous process but whether it exists as such as a God created natural phenomenon or whether it is a consequence of human activity is another question. There is as yet no scientific evidence to positively indicate that humanity pre-dated the carnivorous and omnivorous creatures. Evidence that does exist is construed to indicate the opposite - that humanity evolved into existence well after the food chain with carnivorous creatures was up and going.

Nevertheless, the further back one reaches into the past ages, a proportional reduction in the human population as well as its locations of habitation follow. So it is feasible that if humanity predated the dinosaurs and other carnivores, its numbers were so small and its locations so few, remnants of its existence simply haven't been found yet. It is also feasible that the various humanoid beings which in current theories were the evolutionary steps along which present day humanity developed, were instead retrogrades or de-evolved human forms - the way some of us went, rather than the way we all came. In other words it is feasible that a strain of humanity relatively unchanged to the modern day form has existed across the ages. Everyone alive today has been part of that journey if, and to the extent it happened.

Every one of us has a direct connection to the very beginning of time. We can awaken this memory. Back there, it is further feasible that we did spill the first blood through an act of killing (a human) and so changed the universe forever. Once that first death entered the earth (the universe), an intrinsically new factor existed for the first time and therefore also became a force. Entropy was consummated. The plants took up this new demise factor and began to adapt and reflect its presence. The animals that ate the plants became changed as well. Death entered all beings in this world.

The "we are what we eat" adage has profound significance here because when we and the animals ate death, we made it part of ourselves. And so death began to have its effect and its expressions through the psyche of all things, plant, animal and human.. Death and demise began to express themselves within the behaviour and ensuing innovations of life forms. Plants became hunters. Venom, other poisons and 'poisonous' activities such as violence in its multiple forms began to unfold. This process established itself as a 'natural' phenomenon to all perceptive beings because death had entered all and disallowed objective observation to all except the most discerning. This is the main reason why death can appear so natural - we have made it a component of ourselves and our world.

Humanity has become a master innovator of deadly poisonous expressions. This is revealed in the wizardry of its destructive innovations. Its chemical poisons, its weapons, its generalised pathological behaviour and abuse of the earth. Humanity has become fugitive to the outcomes of its own actions - acutely so in present times.

The prevalence of entropy and demise brought futility. Surrender to it brought a sense of harmony and naturalness. This is one reason why there is really no such thing as natural death. Instead it is an entropy-caused biological bankruptcy. This decay or demise factor can also be measured and substantiated by the Genesis documentation of human life span reduction. It is accepted by the author that at least some of these ancient Scriptures just may be authentic and accurate records of human history, and no less important therefore than other archaeological or geological artefacts. The search for what is true must always take precedence. What other people and organisations have done with the information in these Scriptures should not necessarily be a cause of discount for their potential value.

The purpose of the preceding discussion has been to indicate feasibility that humanity initiated the quality of the prevailing food chain. Some of us may want to continue down this path of apparent demise, others of us do not. Each individual will ultimately have free choice. The food chain and diet issues are secondary and consequential factors resulting from motives within the soul of human individuals. But since the food arena involves crucial connections to fundamental aspects of human nature and to the world's well-being it seems essential that we address it.

The animals are innocent. We have forced them, into their natures and their conditions. Animal suffering will end one day. Some of humanity's may not. We must stop killing and we must address the condition within us which led us to do so in the first place. We have the option for a living universe instead of a dying one. A dying universe will naturally have limitations - space, size, durability, longevity etc. It will forever and ever be in demise. A living universe does not have these limitations. There is unlimited room for everyone and everything except maybe those who's work brings demise.

Proclaiming death and the food chain as a natural phenomenon and using by-products of this insidious chain reaction to supposedly sustain and enhance life becomes then an exacerbation and a compounding of the existing affliction. Sustainability and "perma(suggesting permanent)culture" are revealed as mere relativities because in the long term they also will collapse. The organics industry appears to be going down with an extremely common syndrome - premature factualisation. The sprays and other topical poisons this industry avoids will likely re-manifest as another form of insidious demise.

Since (if) we have formed (carved) an entropy bound universe we can use one of its properties to our temporary advantage. If we cease putting more death and misery into the earth, the amount that is already there will gradually but surely reduce due to the instilled entropy.